memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:A bunch of renames
I've started this topic to discuss a number of renames I've been thinking about, all due to similar concerns. I could have tagged all those pages with rename templates and put something on the talk page, but since there are a few, putting this on the forum seemed like a more elegant way of doing things. Basically, the issue I see is that in canon, the terms were used without any species modifyer, but we have taken it upon ourself to add one here. Renaming them to be called the way they were actually called seems to be the more correct way of representing the information. Provisional list: * Kurlan Third Dynasty, to be renamed to Third Dynasty (Kurlan) * Kurlan Fifth Dynasty, to be renamed to Fifth Dynasty * Klingon Second Dynasty, to be renamed to Second Dynasty * Klingon Third Dynasty, to be renamed to Third Dynasty (Klingon) * Klingon First Empire, to be renamed to First Empire * Klingon Second Empire, to be renamed to Second Empire * Bajoran First Republic, to be renamed to First Republic (Bajoran) * Cardassian First Republic, to be renamed to First Republic (Cardassian) Obviously there might be quite a few more, though these are the ones I could think of. (feel free to add suggestions) -- Capricorn (talk) 22:06, September 13, 2015 (UTC) :While I'm not opposed to these per se, I don't see the benefit or renaming these, over some disambiguations too, when the issue seems like it could be better solved with a bg note. - 22:40, September 13, 2015 (UTC) ::Much like Archduk I'm ambivalent about these changes. I wouldn't argue against them or prevent it from happening, but I don't really see the benefit. 31dot (talk) 23:49, September 13, 2015 (UTC) :::I'm not a big fan of these changes and don't see a lot of benefit at this time. Regardless, I updated the "Kurlan Third Dynasty" suggestion to go to "Third Dynasty (Kurlan)" because it shouldn't trump the Klingon one... -- sulfur (talk) 16:42, September 14, 2015 (UTC) The big issue as I see is is that these were just described as the "third dynasty" etc, where the species it's relevant to can only be known from the context. If to the characters on screen it's only known as the third dynasty, then that seems to be the correct name to me. Surprised that's only me, but oh well. -- Capricorn (talk) 21:17, September 15, 2015 (UTC) ::::I am with Capricorn on this. There seems no benefit renaming these pages but it would reflect the way Memory Alpha is listing and presenting the canon information by what was mentioned or how was it spelled/named on screen. Tom (talk) 12:11, September 20, 2015 (UTC) :::::I agree with Tom (and Capricorn). As Tom said, while there's no real benefit per se to MA in renaming the articles, it appears to be more precise from a canon standpoint... and isn't that really what this wiki is all about - canon, and precision? -- Renegade54 (talk) 00:25, September 21, 2015 (UTC) ::::All articles have been renamed and the links are fixed. Tom (talk) 14:23, September 26, 2015 (UTC)